Day 175 - 18 Oct 95 - Page 13
1 MR. MORRIS: It is not our fault the Plaintiffs did not call a
2 witness to counter this person's evidence.
3
4 MR. JUSTICE BELL: But they have judged whether to call a
5 witness on the basis of what you have included in your
6 served statement. You surely understand that?
7
8 MR. MORRIS: Yes, but we are not playing a game. We would like
9 the truth to be heard in the courtroom, and our witness has
10 come to give evidence.
11
12 MR. JUSTICE BELL (To the witness): Just sit down, Mr. Whittle.
13
14 MR. MORRIS: He summarised his evidence. I had never met him
15 until last night, and I am just going to ask him to explain
16 -- I think I have a right to ask him to explain what he
17 means, to give dates or details that arise out of what he
18 said. Anything that was a new issue, I was not going to
19 ask him in terms of things there was no notice of in this
20 statement. So I think I am entitled to do that.
21
22 I also believe I am entitled to refer him to previous
23 witness evidence from the Plaintiffs' executives, or
24 whatever, who have given evidence, to comment about them,
25 or any documents that are relevant. But I was not going to
26 do that, because I was going to stick strictly to,
27 basically, the matters that he raises in his statement.
28 But I believe I am entitled to do all those things, as
29 happened from the beginning of the case for all the
30 witnesses.
31
32 MS. STEEL: Can I make a suggestion?
33
34 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, do. Has Mr. Morris finished, because
35 I want him to finish before you address me.
36
37 MS. STEEL: No, I just wanted to make a suggestion which is
38 rather than doing this on a hypothetical basis, would it
39 not be more sensible for Mr. Morris to ask a question and,
40 if Mr. Rampton has a particular objection to that
41 particular question, to raise it on that question? As far
42 as I understood -----
43
44 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Just listen to me a moment. That may be a
45 possible solution, but what I want to hear, first of all,
46 is what your argument is or, I will try to use a neutral
47 word, expanding on the statement when some time ago, and on
48 more than one occasion, I have expressed my anxiety about
49 this. Indeed, Mr. Morris on 13th October 1995, or
50 thereabouts, in response to my expressed anxieties,
51 actually produced a note of additional evidence to be given
52 by Mr. Whittle. Now it is being suggested that Mr. Whittle
53 give additional evidence again in respect of which there is
54 no prior indication.
55
56 MS. STEEL: I think there is a basic misunderstanding, which is
57 that the additional statement that was added was about new
58 matters. Mr. Morris does not want to go into new matters;
59 he just wants to get some explanation about matters that
60 are already in the statement. As far as I am aware,
